RE: Is wikipedia really an example of a fail for 2.4.12?

>  It doesn’t matter if there is a label or not.   This implementation 
fails SC 2.4.12. 

These two sentences didn't parse for me. 2.4.12 is all about the visible 
label text (and associating it properly programmatically). If there is no 
text presented visually (and I don't think I would agree EN is presented 
as a label for the search input) then you cannot fail 2.4.12.

There are lots of problems with this input, but I don't think 2.4.12 is 
where I'd fail it.

Michael Gower
IBM Accessibility
Research

1803 Douglas Street, Victoria, BC  V8T 5C3
gowerm@ca.ibm.com
voice: (250) 220-1146 * cel: (250) 661-0098 *  fax: (250) 220-8034



From:   <Brooks.Newton@thomsonreuters.com>
To:     <jon.avila@levelaccess.com>, <Jake.Abma@ing.com>, 
<josh@interaccess.ie>, <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Date:   2018-03-05 02:48 PM
Subject:        RE: Is wikipedia really an example of a fail for 2.4.12?



Hey All,
 
As I said before, my opinion is that there is no programmatic/accessible 
name provided for the language select input on the Wikipedia home page. It 
doesn’t matter if there is a label or not.   This implementation fails SC 
2.4.12. 
 
No matter how you analyze the label in this example, there will never be a 
label in the name, because the name doesn’t exist.
 
Now, if “EN” were in fact the label and the name were in fact “English,” 
then I would say this implementation also fails, but for different 
reasons.  This SC was primarily introduced as a way of making sure that 
spoken “labels” would match up with programmatically-determinable names, 
right?  I don’t know about you, but when I pronounce “EN” it sounds 
phonetically like the word “in.”  And, when I pronounce the first syllable 
of the word “English,” it sounds phonetically like “ing.”  The two 
phonemes simply don’t match up.  This brings up the broader issue of how 
contractions, abbreviations and other shortened forms of words don’t 
always sound like the words they represent.  And, therefore, I think that 
abbreviations may not be reliably used to satisfy the label in name 
requirement. What are others’ thoughts on this?
 
Brooks
 
From: Jonathan Avila [mailto:jon.avila@levelaccess.com] 
Sent: Monday, March 05, 2018 3:16 PM
To: Abma, J.D. (Jake); Newton, Brooks (Legal); josh@interaccess.ie; 
w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Subject: RE: Is wikipedia really an example of a fail for 2.4.12?
 
Wikipedia definitely has some accessibility issues on this page.
 
From the stand point of SC 3.3.2  - G167 can be used for the search field 
itself – but not the Language select.
 
The search field doesn’t have a text label so I don’t think 2.4.12 
applies.
 
The language  select doesn’t have a programmatic name – so it fails SC 
1.3.1/4.1.2.
 
Regarding SC 2.4.12 – this is tricky because there the visual label – the 
value for the location is not sufficient to label the element and thus it 
fails SC 3.3.2 – but by virtue of failing both 3.3.2 and 1.3.1 it would 
also fail SC 2.4.12 unless we are saying no name is = to no label – in 
which case null = null which is true. 
 
Jonathan
 
From: Abma, J.D. (Jake) <Jake.Abma@ing.com> 
Sent: Monday, March 5, 2018 12:52 PM
To: Brooks.Newton@thomsonreuters.com; josh@interaccess.ie; 
w3c-wai-gl@w3.org; Jonathan Avila <jon.avila@levelaccess.com>
Subject: Re: Is wikipedia really an example of a fail for 2.4.12?
 
 
Hi Brooks/Josh,
 
Funny thing here is they probably implemented it incorrectly as the 'for' 
and 'id' indeed don't match but the 'for' and the 'name' attribute on the 
input does.
 
But if I remember well, referencing a comment from Jonathan not so long 
ago, it doesn't matter as the intention of the visible text in this case, 
the "EN" does serve as the label. The example mentioned by Jonathan was a 
search field with no label where the button with the text "search" serves 
the label purpose.
 
So I'm wondering whether​ the "wrongly" implemented for/id combo (if not 
done on purpose) matters...
 
@Jonathan ?
 

From: Brooks.Newton@thomsonreuters.com <Brooks.Newton@thomsonreuters.com>
Sent: Monday, March 5, 2018 5:16 PM
To: josh@interaccess.ie; w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Subject: RE: Is wikipedia really an example of a fail for 2.4.12? 
 
Hi Josh,
 
From my perspective, this isn’t a relevant test for 2.4.12.  I’m no 
accessible name computation expert, but I don’t think the language select 
input on the Wikipedia home page has an accessible name.  In other words, 
there is no programmatically bound label text associated with the input.
 
What is wrapped in <label> markup has not been programmatically bound to 
the associated select input.  Specifically the value of the for attribute 
in the label attribute doesn’t match the value of the id attribute on the 
select element.
 
So, the text value of the selected option in <select> is what’s announced 
by JAWS and NVDA as the name of the input.  The selected option, by 
default, is “English” when I browse to Wikipedia from my stateside 
location.   But the word “English” just a heuristic guess that some AT 
make at what might be a discernible label for this input is, right? Anyone 
on the list, please tell me if I’m wrong here. 
 
So there is no accessible name to match up with the visible label.
 
Brooks
 
From: Joshue O Connor - InterAccess [mailto:josh@interaccess.ie] 
Sent: Friday, March 02, 2018 10:40 AM
To: WCAG
Subject: Is wikipedia really an example of a fail for 2.4.12?
 
Question on a potential edge case - I'm not sure this a fail if the visual 
label is abbreviated but still comprehensible and following an established 
convention? [1]
 
Accessible matches Visible. The visible and accessible name of a label 
match

TEXT
https://www.wikipedia.org => Search field has language dropdown with text 
"EN" but has name "English" (or other language when selected)
 
Thoughts?
 
[1] 
https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/WCAG_2.1_Implementations#2.4.12_Label_in_Name 

__
Joshue O Connor
Director / InterAccess.ie
 
-----------------------------------------------------------------
ATTENTION:
The information in this e-mail is confidential and only meant for the 
intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, don't use or 
disclose it in any way. Please let the sender know and delete the message 
immediately.
-----------------------------------------------------------------